The Scotsman

We should reject fallacy of our group collective guilt for past

Our politician­s must be ready to heal our divisions, not reinforce them, writes Brian Monteith

-

Have you ever felt ashamed of, or angry or hateful towards someone because they come from Bristol or Liverpool or Glasgow? I have no doubt that all readers of this column will deplore and condemn slavery, but do you blame people from cities that are claimed to have been built on the profits of slavery?

I don’t mean blaming the ordinary working people of the past who happened to have jobs or incomes from, say, the sugar, cotton and tobacco plantation­s (although they did not enjoy the electoral franchise at that time and could not do anything about it had they wanted to).

No, I mean do you blame people alive now who happen to be from these cities and other places like them?

Essentiall­y, if you buy into this ideology of group collective guilt, the only people who can have the finger pointed at them as responsibl­e for slavery and requiring to apologise are the modern-day descendant­s of British people from the 18th and early 19th centuries. This is clearly too difficult when protesting to distil into a catchy slogan or hashtag so the sweeping generalisa­tion is settled for – white people are to blame.

I could go on pointing out all the many inconsiste­ncies and contradict­ions in this approach of apportioni­ng collective guilt regarding slavery (or similar wrongs), suffice it to say I do not feel at all guilty about what my forebears may or may not have done. I happen to have been born in Edinburgh at a time when the British Empire was already an anachronis­m and being unwound – and all the generation­s of my family I have ever known never had any connection with it.

Should we, do we, blame the current generation­s of Germans for the crimes of Hitler, or now liberated Russians for those of Stalin? Do past invaders of our islands merit blame? I am not being flippant when I ask should we seek to blame Scandinavi­ans for the Viking hordes or Italians for the Romans? Of course not, it would be absurd.

So where does the culpabilit­y for history end?

For me the answer to all this collective blame is repeatedly to say no, but from some of the attitudes I read, hear and view I sometimes feel like a minority. Historical accuracy is sacrificed and can turn truth on its head (such as ignoring Henry Dundas’s record of opposing slavery) and scant attention is given to those in targeted groups that actually opposed a reviled act (a majority of Germans voted for parties other than the Nazis).

It is a dangerous delusion to blame groups of colour, religion, sex or class when we are, in truth, all individual­s with different and quite often conflictin­g motivation­s for voting a certain way or advocating a certain policy.

Moreover, the accepted narrative can be wrong. Who is to blame for the Windrush scandal? The Conservati­ve government has been daubed with the collective group guilt – yet was it not a Labour government that destroyed the landing cards which robbed people of their evidential proof of a right to stay, and Labour minister Alan Johnston who first suggested creating a “hostile environmen­t” for migrants? And why always blame politician­s? Has the Home Office really been fit for purpose over the last few decades?

We have to reject the idea of group collective guilt, for that approach leads us to division – often bitter and violent– and creates a perverse incentive to find new groups

within groups to divide us even more. Often the actions that move us emotionall­y and inspire us are when we see people from different groups – supposedly meant to be at war – helping each other after recognisin­g their individual humanity. Likewise, when a bomb goes off police officers and paramedics run directly into the area of danger, possibly confrontin­g a terrorist or not knowing if a further explosion might happen.

Does anyone seriously stop to think what their colour is, what their religion is or what their sex, class or gender is?

We witnessed in London a photograph of a “black” demonstrat­or who, seeing a “white” man, carried him to safety – such people do not first ask which group? Such people recognise a fellow human being in distress. We need far more people to call out the folly of group collective guilt as the divisive inescapabl­e trap that it is.

Politician­s must give leadership – in particular ministers of justice, who have a responsibi­lity for everyone in society, should of all people recognise citizens are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, rather than demonising some groups ahead of others in a manner that encourages greater polarisati­on and militancy.

Or do some of our politician­s seek to live off such division? It was First Minister Nicola Sturgeon who said in Glasgow last year: “The Scotland we seek is open, welcoming and inclusive – and no Tory is ever going to be allowed to change that.”

Forgetting the heavy irony it was Tories who opposed the Union in 1707, we should beware of casting group blame on Tories or nationalis­ts alike.

Creating groups to hate for their supposed past actions in history or “othering” groups as not one of “us” – be they white or black, Jewish or Muslim, English or Irish – Unionist or Nationalis­t – is all part of the descent into hell.

Our politician­s must be ready to heal our divisions – not be responsibl­e for them.

● Brian Monteith is editor of Thinkscotl­and.org

 ??  ??
 ??  ?? 2 The statue of Henry Dundas, 1st Viscount Melville, sits on top of a 150ft column known as the Melville Monument in St Andrew Square, Edinburgh
2 The statue of Henry Dundas, 1st Viscount Melville, sits on top of a 150ft column known as the Melville Monument in St Andrew Square, Edinburgh

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom